The $5,000 budget was spent on food, transportation, location and rehearsal area fees, wardrobe, props, the occasional crew wages and miscellaneous gear. One could point out the irony of a larger budget in a Minimalist film, but the finished project is what really matters, of course. (Though the fact that this was shot over an extremely extended period of time quickly adds up the budget.)
While black and white fits both an artistic style and a "bare bones" ideal, it is also beneficial in this particular category as it usually makes shooting a lot less complicated. There were a few contrast/balance issues here; I'm not sure if that was a conscious decision or not, but it would still be a good idea to have a good quality monitor on set to ensure that all shots match whichever style one wants to use.
Apparently much of the gear needed was already owned, which helped save a lot of money. And though the budget is mostly made up of incidentals, they are all vitally necessary for a successful movie. One item that often gets overlooked is crew wages - there is always the temptation to use ones' friends, relatives, and neighbors in these positions to avoid paying a professional. But unless your acquaintance is an expert, or at least has some knowledge of what task you want them to perform, one is likely to end up with an unbearably long shoot or hours of unusable footage. In some cases, its better to bite the bullet and hire the professional.
Though Minimalism is not my particular area of expertise, I do love the format of this movie. Its unique and creative and - thankfully - not your typical sappy romance. And even with an overarching sadness, there are occasional moments of levity.
The difficulty here is in trying to surreptitiously tell an audience that one is making an art film without beating them over the head with it. There are some things that point in this direction - the wide shots and long takes, long stretches without dialog, and the black and white format. But a longer running time, the rambling conversations, and an odd and somewhat confusing editing format seem to work against this idea.
The film ends with a Sartre quote, which also gives a bit of a hint to the intended audience; this technique could be employed more often throughout the film, perhaps using quotes from filmmakers or artists who were influenced by this movement as differentiations for each story. Along the same lines, shots of iconic paintings, books, and films indicative of this era could also be included throughout the film as a subconscious homage. Even incorporating "trademarks" of other directors - specific shots, framing, costuming, etc - could work in one's favor. (Though the director did employ this technique, as shots with excessive headroom are a favorite of American independent filmmaker Jim Jarmusch.)
Subtlety rather than overtness is certainly the way to go in this case, though it is still a very delicate balance. While one wants an art film to stand on its own, unless this movie is being shown in an art-oriented venue, it would probably be a good idea to bill this with at least a little bit of backstory.
In our modern culture, which suffers quite painfully from superficial romanticism, we are very seldom shown the ugly side of relationships. Though this film may be depressing - especially for anyone who happens to see themselves in any three of its stories - it is still a reality that is all too ignored.
"He yawned again as he repeated to himself 'Its true, its absolutely true: I have attained the age of reason.'" -Jean Paul Sartre, The Age of Reason.
